On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 1:03 PM, Jeff Horelick <jdh...@gentoo.org> wrote: > I think this issue is currently in far too murky of a state to get any > well-informed issue from the council. Perhaps when the issues get > hammered out a bit more, but not currently.
I tend to agree. Taking a position for or against some piece of technology doesn't really make sense. Making a decision on some implementation detail that has a real impact on the distro makes sense. It is hard to anticipate what kinds of crises will continue to arise. So, best to deal with them one at a time. Of course, it would be best if the various package maintainers could talk to each other to anticipate issues BEFORE they arise. If upstream wants to rename or move half their binaries and the maintainers want to follow upstream, I don't have a big problem with that per se, but at least talk about it on the lists before unmasking things/etc. Best to keep the council decisions actionable. And it is probably best to let the directly impacted maintainers be the ones to appeal to the council if the concern is breakage/etc. If we were less of an enthusiast/choice distro then the obviously solution would be to just ship a working udev and wait and see how the whole mess works itself out elsewhere. It will be messy for a while for Gentoo, because we generally strive to be "interesting." :) Rich
